3 ms·

Social security, unlike all the rest of the US Government welfare programs, draws from a separate trust. It currently has roughly $3 trillion in the trust. When

Social security, unlike all the rest of the US Government welfare programs, draws from a separate trust. It currently has roughly $3 trillion in the trust. When you pay income tax, there’s a portion (usually noted on the paystub) that goes directly to the trust. If they continue current payments, the income of everyone stays the same, and the tax percentage stays the same, then it will run out of funds after a while (currently predicted to be 2035). However, I would bet pretty strongly that one of those constraints won’t hold - probably the amount paid out to each person will be lowered, although the tax percentage could also increase.

eek2121 4y ago
- xapata 4y ago
  One solution is to invite more immigration to balance the falling birth rate. More workers means more tax revenue.
  - bdcravens 4y ago
    Or raise taxes. This could take the form of raising the percentage, or increase the yearly cap, so that high earners contribute more.
  - whoooooo123 4y ago
    Immigrants get old too.
    - xapata 4y ago
      The USA has plenty of land and food. We can invite more immigrants for a long time. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/636499/one-billion-americans-by-matthew-yglesias/ https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/636499/one-billion-...
    - alistairSH 4y ago
      Sure, but the current problem is workers are retiring faster than we can replace them with workers from younger generations. Bring in a bunch of immigrants in their early 20s and let them contribute for 40+ years, reproduce (immigrants historically have more children than native-born), and the problem gets a lot smaller, if not completely solved. There are quite a few knobs we can turn to keep the SS program solvent. The conservative push to disband the whole system in favor of private savings is one of the most dramatic. And likely to put us back to the 1920s, with those unable to work, wether by age or disability, becoming destitute. That's not a state of affairs we should strive to reproduce, IMO.
- ndriscoll 4y ago
  > People have been saying this for decades Yep, if you look at the historical trustee reports[1], in 1990 it was projected to run out in 2043. In 2000 it was projected to run out in 2037. The same 2037 estimate was given in 2010. In 2020, it was estimated at 2034, which is the current estimate. Of course money is just numbers to allocate worker productivity. The real important things are demographic ratios and what percent of our productive capacity we want to allocate to taking care of retirees. The running out of the trust just more directly forces us to revisit that question. [1] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/TR/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/TR/index.html
  - gilbetron 4y ago
    "running out" means the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund, after which taxes (as they stand) will be able to cover 77% of the needs of that fund. It does not mean that SS goes away.
slv77 4y ago
The “trust” is like someone who is horribly over their head in debt writing an IOU to themselves for next months groceries and pocketing the IOU. They can then continue to party while they pay their pocket with the IOU secure in the knowledge that food next month is assured.

eek2121 4y ago

xapata 4y ago
One solution is to invite more immigration to balance the falling birth rate. More workers means more tax revenue.
- bdcravens 4y ago
  Or raise taxes. This could take the form of raising the percentage, or increase the yearly cap, so that high earners contribute more.
- whoooooo123 4y ago
  Immigrants get old too.
  - xapata 4y ago
    The USA has plenty of land and food. We can invite more immigrants for a long time. https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/636499/one-billion-americans-by-matthew-yglesias/ https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/636499/one-billion-...
  - alistairSH 4y ago
    Sure, but the current problem is workers are retiring faster than we can replace them with workers from younger generations. Bring in a bunch of immigrants in their early 20s and let them contribute for 40+ years, reproduce (immigrants historically have more children than native-born), and the problem gets a lot smaller, if not completely solved. There are quite a few knobs we can turn to keep the SS program solvent. The conservative push to disband the whole system in favor of private savings is one of the most dramatic. And likely to put us back to the 1920s, with those unable to work, wether by age or disability, becoming destitute. That's not a state of affairs we should strive to reproduce, IMO.
ndriscoll 4y ago
> People have been saying this for decades Yep, if you look at the historical trustee reports[1], in 1990 it was projected to run out in 2043. In 2000 it was projected to run out in 2037. The same 2037 estimate was given in 2010. In 2020, it was estimated at 2034, which is the current estimate. Of course money is just numbers to allocate worker productivity. The real important things are demographic ratios and what percent of our productive capacity we want to allocate to taking care of retirees. The running out of the trust just more directly forces us to revisit that question. [1] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/TR/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/TR/index.html
- gilbetron 4y ago
  "running out" means the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund, after which taxes (as they stand) will be able to cover 77% of the needs of that fund. It does not mean that SS goes away.

slv77 4y ago

The “trust” is like someone who is horribly over their head in debt writing an IOU to themselves for next months groceries and pocketing the IOU. They can then continue to party while they pay their pocket with the IOU secure in the knowledge that food next month is assured.